|
1962. vonKreedon - 12/4/2008 10:45:42 PM It's not a matter of disagreement, Jex and I agree on most issues, it's a matter of volume and content-to-noise ratio. 1963. thoughtful - 12/4/2008 10:54:33 PM talk about your noise!
:) 1964. thoughtful - 12/4/2008 10:57:06 PM I agree with frustration that jay expressed a long time ago about jex when he created the lies thread
jex has posted lots of stuff, some of it useful, (some of it disgusting...and he is far from alone in making disgusting posts) but the most useful and interesting stuff he's posted is also the most rare...his own original analysis.
1965. wabbit - 12/4/2008 11:08:45 PM Message # 1942 wonkers, quantity does not equal quality. Nobody doubts that Jexster could be a real asset to the Mote. It's just a shame he chooses not to be, and I see no reason the majority of us should have to work around him anymore. VK is right, it is not reasonable to be expected to scroll past Jexster all the time.
Now, if you can get AC to give us an 'ignore' feature… 1966. wabbit - 12/4/2008 11:13:28 PM Message # 1956 I don't have a lot of compassion for Concerned these past few months. His posts were no more out of line than some of Jex's.
Not true. First, I've never seen concerned make from 15-30 posts from seconds to a couple minutes apart, most of which are insults or pointless sarcasm. That is trolling, like it or not, and it is the single most disruptive thing a poster can do. That is exactly what got cazart dumped when we first started. He decided to pitch a hissy fit for being fooled by a simple html trick. CalGal and I spent hours cleaning up after him. Jexster's spew has been tolerated for years because one time out of perhaps fifty, he actually has something to contribute to a discussion. If all he wants to do is post one-liners or links, he has his very own thread for that, but I'm not picking up after him in other threads. I'm tired of seeing a long string of posts that could easily have been combined into one more coherent post. That would show some consideration for the other members of the Mote, something Jexster is proud not to have. He's been spoiled and gotten selfish and rude. As someone pointed out last time we went through this (or maybe the time before, or the time before that, ad nauseum), if he was in your living room, he'd never be invited back.
And I would like to see one post where concerned started in about Jexster's nephew.
Whether or not you like concerned, he can dish it out with the best of them and he takes plenty, too. I don't have any sympathy for anyone who leaves because their wittle feewings got hurt. People like concerned don't leave this forum because they can't take criticism or disagreement, or because their candidate lost an election. They leave because they get frustrated trying to have a discussion around Jexster, who thinks he is being clever. And I take the bulk of the blame, having defended him and let him get away with it for so many years.
Several of us have spent too long trying to get Jexster to understand. He's been asked nicely too many times. It's old and nobody wants to hear it anymore. As arky said, much more eloquently than I could, Jexster's fate is up to him. 1967. wonkers2 - 12/4/2008 11:17:54 PM True, quantity does not equal quality. But not everyone's definition of quality is the same. I don't want to start a war with anyone, but the quality of many posts by many other than Jexter isn't the greatest either. I think we have a pretty good mix of banter, links to videos, cartoons, pictures or articles of interest along with occasional thoughtful analysis. We've never been a site devoted primarily to original analysis or fiction or commentary. Suggesting that we should try to be that is wishful thinking, in my opinion. 1968. wonkers2 - 12/4/2008 11:23:13 PM When I occasionally attempt analysis of a serious topic I usually don't get a response from anyone. When I do it's frequently from Jexter or occasionally thoughtful. Jex's comments are sarcastic or funny and thoughtful's are serious and thoughtful. I'm grateful to both for a response. 1969. wabbit - 12/4/2008 11:29:16 PM And who should be the arbiter of how much shit we need to take from Jexster to get that one nugget? You?
This isn't a pissing contest. Nobody here, not one person, can compare to Jexster for pure disruption and ignorance. Every post isn't expected to be a gem, but in his case it's 95% coal.
We've never been a site devoted primarily to original analysis or fiction or commentary. Suggesting that we should try to be that is wishful thinking, in my opinion.
Oh really? I guess you weren't around years ago, when the discussion level was pretty high and there was plenty of original fiction, poetry and commentary. Maybe you need to spend a few weeks in the archives. I don't doubt we will never be what we once were, but it's past time we stop putting up with idiocy.
Regardless, the fact that you like Jexster doesn't really make any difference to me. I like him too. So what. He doesn't get to continue to dictate what the rest of us have to tolerate from him. And neither do you. Jexster can choose to piss away in his own thread, and you can interact with him in there all day long. But he continues to spill over everywhere else, and that is going to stop. 1970. wabbit - 12/4/2008 11:37:43 PM We've never been a site devoted primarily to original analysis or fiction or commentary.
As a quick follow-up, that is exactly what got us kicked out of Slate. They wanted discussion of their articles. We were having discussions about whatever we were interested in and not enough of it was tied back to Slate. That is why the Mote was born. 1971. arkymalarky - 12/5/2008 12:21:01 AM I'm in total agreement with Wabbit. 1972. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 12:24:54 AM Sorry, I was around almost from the beginning of the Fray. I used a different moniker at that time. And it's true that the posts at that time were more erudite thanks to pseudoerasmus and others than they are now. The forum has evolved but I don't think its fair or accurate as you seem to be doing to attribute the changes to Jexter. The obsessive nitpicking of Pelle Nilson was a much bigger turnoff. Experience has shown that, for the most part most of the threads operate about as well with or without a host. Your dedication to the Sports thread is an exception. The others seem to do fairly well without a lot of nitpicking over off topic posts. In my opinion dumping Jexter in favor of getting VonKreedon back would be the equivalent of trading a Great Dane for a Chihuahua. 1973. arkymalarky - 12/5/2008 12:42:24 AM Only when measured in terms of posting quantity. 1974. wabbit - 12/5/2008 1:22:28 AM I'll take a thoughtful Chihuahua over a Great Dane that thinks it's a good idea to jump through windows and rip the house apart any day of the week. 1975. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 1:30:29 AM Arky, that's a matter of opinion. 1976. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 1:43:15 AM Further, although I found Pelle irritating at times I would never have suggested that he stop posting, and I would now welcome him back to this forum as I would concerned with whom I disagreed 99% of the time. I don't think we improve The Mote by banning participants. Nothing wrong with jawboning, however. 1977. wabbit - 12/5/2008 2:22:43 AM If you still don't understand the point, wonkers, I don't know how much clearer it can be made. Discussing or arguing a point and trolling are simply not the same thing. Jexster can spam and troll his own thread to his heart's content. That was its purpose. I'm betting he will rise to the occasion in that thread. However, no matter how many times he's been asked to discuss and not troll or spam, he has never had the slightest bit of interest in doing anything but exactly what he felt like doing in any other thread.
If you can't admit that Jexster makes post after post after post, very often with to no effect *except* to disrupt, something Pelle *never* did, then I will accept that no matter what evidence is in front of you, you will not see it. This is not about who is agreeable, or who is objectionable, or who is politically correct. This is ALL about respect for this forum and the other participants here.
We may not improve the Mote by being rid of Jexster, but I seriously doubt things could get any worse. How about this — I've been making excuses to keep him on for a very, very long time now. He has only proven me wrong. Let's say we see how the Mote does without him for a couple years. And face it, this isn't capital punishment. Besides, I no longer believe this forum, or any of its participants excepting you, means anything at all to Jexster. I'm willing to be reviled for making an unpopular decision for a few more years. Won't be the first time.
I admire your defense of Jexster, truly — I know that you are friends IRL. But as I've said, I don't give a rat's ass. Feel free to carry on your defense, but I have said all I have to say. 1978. wabbit - 12/5/2008 2:24:11 AM Calling the typo police… 1979. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/5/2008 3:57:01 AM When I occasionally attempt analysis of a serious topic I usually don't get a response from anyone.
That's because I usually agree! 1980. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/5/2008 4:00:57 AM wabb- I don't remember you ever being so infuriated. What, specific post(s) of Jexster's set you off? 1981. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 4:02:22 AM I have neither admitted nor denied with your characterizations of Jex's activities but rather said that they don't bother me nearly as much as they do you and a couple of others. May I suggest also that his contributions to the political thread in comments, links to serious links such as those of Juan Cole and others, cartoons, etc. have far exceeded those of anyone else. I wonder if you have ever bothered to look at any of them? I don't recall ever seeing a single post from you on the Politics Thread. If someone asked me what your political views are I wouldn't be able to hazard a guess. [It's possible my memory is failing. If so, I apologise.]
And, as I said, I don't think its fair to attribute, as you seem to be doing, the Mote's decline, as you characterize it, to Jexter. I admire your faithful work on the Sports Thread but I am constrained to point out that it does not inspire a great deal of participation compared to the rich variety of comment on the Politics Thread.
|
